This may surprising some people, but in the so-called “War on Terror,” the terrorists have won. That”s going to be hard to accept, but it”s true. One of the goals of a terrorist is to force his enemies to change their way of living, to scare his enemies so much that they fundamentally alter their way of living.

Just look at our increasingly intrusive airport security measures, which have sparked a backlash of protest among airline passengers and privacy advocacy groups. They understandably are upset with the full body-scanning machines and the even more invasive pat-down procedures, which are used as an alternative for passengers who refuse to be subjected to the revealing high-tech scanners.

While the use of body scanners may be justified under certain circumstances, they should be used only if a passenger fails to satisfy a trained screener who has observed, profiled and questioned him or her. That is the technique successfully used by Israel”s El Al airline and should be copied by the TSA.

The TSA does have a program that uses observers; it”s called Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques or SPOT. Unfortunately, it is a far cry from the Israeli system.

Instead of having the screener who”s looking at the ticket talk to the passenger and ask questions, the TSA has employees stand around and observe from a distance. Also the TSA has not settled on the standards needed to stop suspicious passengers.

More important, if body scans are deemed to be a necessary added security measure, there should not be a pat-down option.

The pat-downs used by TSA workers are highly invasive and a clear invasion of privacy. Moreover, they are relatively useless, according to several law enforcement officers.

What may not be widely known, airports have the option of replacing the TSA with private screeners. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., who will soon be chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, has been reminding airports that the law that created the TSA gave airports the right to switch to private screeners after a two-year period.

Mica, who was one of the authors of the original TSA bill, says the TSA is relying more on passenger humiliation than on practices that are proven staples of airport security, such as those used by Israel.

He noted that the law authorized a test program in which five airports were allowed to use private contractors. A number of studies since then have shown contractors perform a bit better than federal screeners, and they”re also more flexible and open to innovation.

Recently, Mica wrote to the heads of more than 150 airports nationwide suggesting they opt out of TSA screening.

It is a suggestion that airport officials should seriously consider. Private screeners may not solve all of the problems with airport security, but they could offer a better alternative to an inefficient bureaucracy an option that is more effective, less intrusive and more appealing to airline passengers.